LibQual+ Summary
The LibQual+ survey was administered to 43 libraries in the United States during
April of 2001. There were 20,000 respondents from these 43 institutions, most of
which belonged to the Association of Research Libraries. The University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign contributed 669 respondents to this national effort.
The survey was used in part to identify 25 questions that could be used in future
surveys, thus eliminating one of the major complaints (redundancy of questions)
from those who took the survey at the University of Illinois.
The LibQual+ team was also able to isolate 4 factors as contributing to the
construct of library service quality. These four factors were Affect of Service, the
Library as Place, Personal Control, and Access to Collections. This cuts in half
the eight factors identified in the LibQual+ 2000 survey. These formerly used
eight factors, and which were used to report this year’s results are: Assurance,
Empathy, Library as Place, Reliability, Responsiveness, Tangibles,
Instruction/Custom Items, and Self-Reliance.
In addition to the responses to the 56 individual questions relating to these eight
factors, three questions attempted to gauge an overall service quality and service
satisfaction. The mean for these three overall areas (Overall Service Quality,
Satisfaction with Service Affect, and Satisfaction with Support for Scholarly
Efforts was 6.99, 7.23, and 6.81 on a nine point scale. The University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign scored above the mean in all three areas (see below).
What the survey did was to measure specific levels of satisfaction along a
continuum. In answering specific questions, respondents were asked to indicate
what the minimum level of service was, what the desired level of service was and
what the perceived level of service was. In this way “gap” scores were
developed to indicate the measurable difference between perceived and
minimum and perceived and desired levels of service. Almost invariably a gap
will exist between the desired level of service and the perceived level of service.
While not ideal, the closer a service organization comes to the desired level the
better. On the other hand when a negative gap appears between the minimum
level and the perceived level (i.e. perceived service is less than what is minimally
acceptable), then the library has a problem. The LibQual+ survey allows libraries
to discern what broad user groups perceive about these various levels of service
and therefore can tailor their remedial measures accordingly.
Summary results of the LibQual+ 2001 survey for the University of Illinois at U-C
Demographic overview
669 respondents
Faculty
Grad
Lib Staff
Staff
Undergrad
25%
19%
16%
23%
17%
By Discipline (defined by LibQual+ 2001)
Agriculture
Architecture
Business
Education
Engineering
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Other
Performing and Fine Arts
Science
Social Sciences
Undecided
Gender
Male 47%
Age
<22
22-30
31-45
>45
14%
22%
26%
38%
Use on premises
Daily
Monthly
Never
Quarterly
Weekly
22%
27%
2%
18%
31%
7%
0%
6%
5%
16%
0%
2%
10%
1%
24%
4%
13%
11%
0%
Female 53%
Remote use of electronic library resources
Daily
Monthly
Never
Quarterly
Weekly
20%
20%
11%
14%
35%
Summary ratings
Mean
UIUC
Overall
Service Affect
Support Scholarly Efforts
6.99
7.21
7.23
7.29
6.81
7.01
Gap Analysis – Problem Areas relating to specific survey questions
Aggregate with all respondents (43 North American Libraries)
Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records
Negative gap of .46
UIUC respondents
(selected areas showing trouble areas)
Undergraduate Students – no negative gaps
Graduate Students – no negative gaps
Faculty
Complete runs of journal titles -- negative gap of .43
Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records – negative gap of .67
A library website enabling me to find information on my own – negative gap of
.39
Staff
Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records – negative gap of .25
A secure and safe place – negative gap of .01
Library Staff
Access to collections
Convenient access to Library collections – negative gap of .22
Assurance – all negative gaps
Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions .78
Employees who are consistently courteous 1.02
Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions .25
Employees who instill confidence in users .32
Empathy – all negative gaps
Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion .70
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do .65
Employees who understand the needs of their users .64
Having the users’ best interests at heart .47
Library as Place – all negative gaps
Space for group/individual study and research 1.30
Space that facilitates quiet study 1.17
A comfortable and inviting location .96
A secure and safe place .86
A haven for quiet and solitude .66
Reliability – all negative gaps
Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records 1.74
Responsiveness – all negative gaps
Willingness to help users .43
Readiness to respond to users’ questions .40
Prompt service to users .24
Tangibles – all negative gaps
Visually appealing facilities .86
Modern equipment that lets me easily access the information I need .72
Self-reliance – negative gap
Easy to use access tools that allow me to find things on my own .49